the claim it was to force future sales is absurd. it actually *reduced*
the need for future sales, because apple was extending the useful life
of the phone.
You are welcome to your opinion.
it's not an opinion.
nospam wrote:
the claim it was to force future sales is absurd. it actually *reduced* >>>> the need for future sales, because apple was extending the useful life >>>> of the phone.
You are welcome to your opinion.
it's not an opinion.
Normal adult opinions are supposed to be based on the actual FACTS, nospam.
The facts are that Apple did it secretly and lied about it afterward,
and then changed the release notes to fit the lies & then got caught.
The facts are that Apple lost about a billion dollars in court cases,
where it's more important to note that Apple also lost the criminal
cases, where there's no way for Apple to buy their way out of the
admission of guilt.
Given that a billion dollars a year is nothing to a company like Apple,
to Apple, getting caught in these lies is just a part of doing business.
This new British case is just another billion dollars in fines to Apple.
nospam wrote:
I didn't have an apple phone till last year, so I don't know about
this, but I wonder; Did apple notify users they were throttling the
IOS in phones with crappy or old batteries? If they did notify, then
I don't see the problem, and professor arlen is straining at gnats.
what apple did (which is not what you describe or widely reported) was
in the release notes. granted, nobody reads them, but it was disclosed.
Apple admitted to lying about the release notes, where what happened was Apple secretly backdated them well after the fact, and even then, Apple's "admission" of throttling was carefully yet rather brilliantly cleverly worded to "look" like throttling phones to less than half improved speeds.
In the _criminal_ case, *Apple admitted to "knowingly and willingly"* defrauding affected customers.
Apple paid the _criminal_ fine because in criminal court you can't buy your way out of the admission of guilt like you can with civil cases.
I didn't have an apple phone till last year, so I don't know about
this, but I wonder; Did apple notify users they were throttling the
IOS in phones with crappy or old batteries? If they did notify,
then I don't see the problem, and professor arlen is straining at
gnats.
what apple did (which is not what you describe or widely reported) was
in the release notes. granted, nobody reads them, but it was disclosed.
most people never noticed any change in performance, and it took nearly
a year until someone did.
what they *did* notice is the frequency of sudden unexpected shutdowns
was much lower. that's a *lot* worse than a slight momentary change in performance.
If they didn't notify, but did it surreptitiously, with no
notification, then actually lied about it, that's a real
underhanded and shitty way of "serving" their customers. Even
iKooks wouldn't like to be shit on.
they didn't lie about anything, although they could have explained it a
bit better.
So, what actually happened back then?
what happened was apple fixed the problem of unexpected sudden
shutdowns due to aging batteries being unable to source peak demands by clipping only those peak demands.
that is very different than an overall throttling, as is widely and incorrectly reported.
most users aren't interested in learning the full story and blew it out
of proportion by feeding on linkbait headlines.
Apple paid the _criminal_ fine because in criminal court you can't buy your >> way out of the admission of guilt like you can with civil cases.
There was no criminal case.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 at 02:24:24, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: (my
responses usually follow points raised):
Apple paid the _criminal_ fine because in criminal court you can't
buy your
way out of the admission of guilt like you can with civil cases.
There was no criminal case.
You are an idiot because everyone else knows about the French criminal case that Apple pleaded guilty to and paid the fine and publicly admitted guilt.
Look it up before you respond because otherwise you're just an idiot moron.
Look it up before you respond because otherwise you're just an idiot moron.
You look it up and present the evidence of your claim.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 at 18:58:44, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: (my
responses usually follow points raised):
Look it up before you respond because otherwise you're just an idiot
moron.
You look it up and present the evidence of your claim.
My last advice for you is to REPEAT that you should stop acting like the idiot moron that you are and just run a search for what only you don't know and only you deny because there must be hundreds of reports about the criminal case that Apple admitted guilt to publicly on their web site. https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+pleads+guilty+to+french+criminal+case+throttling
So, I guess their newer software probably had a notification,
something like: " your system is running at .7 clock speed, because
the battery needs to be replaced".
no, because that's not anywhere close to what happened.
what happened was that only *peak* *demands* were clipped. everything
else was unaffected. one example is apps might take slightly longer to
launch (which is not going to be noticeable without a stopwatch).
how would *you* have solved the problem of unexpected sudden shutdowns?
This seems like an honest approach, and most would like that. I'd
buy a new battery at an apple store, knowing it would fix the
problem for sure.
there was no need to buy a new battery.
nospam wrote:
So, I guess their newer software probably had a notification,
something like: " your system is running at .7 clock speed, because
the battery needs to be replaced".
no, because that's not anywhere close to what happened.
Apple admitted to knowingly defrauding customers in the French _criminal_ case, which, if nospam is ignorant of, just proves how ignorant iKooks
are because we _discussed_ this French case on this very newsgroup for
weeks!
Look it up as Apple only tells the truth when forced to do so under oath.
What's interesting is the iKooks own such a low intelligence that they
can't even comprehend that they _discussed_ this case for weeks on end, and even now, years later, they remain blissfully unaware of the facts.
Apple admitted _criminal_ guilt.
Apple paid the _criminal_ fine.
Apple was forced to publicly admit criminal guilt for a month on their French-language web site.
Anyone ignorant of these well known facts has no business refuting them.
what happened was that only *peak* *demands* were clipped. everything
else was unaffected. one example is apps might take slightly longer to
launch (which is not going to be noticeable without a stopwatch).
I'm the one who broke the news of the throttling and I broke the news of Apple's admission of criminal guilt (and the lesser admissions in the many civil cases) to this very newsgroup which covered in detail what happened.
1. Apple power delivery design sucked in _some_ iPhones
2. Apple secretly "solved" that problem by fucking its customer
3. Apple also secretly changed the release notes well after the fact
4. And Tim Cook was caught in a very public lie about that secret change
Apple customers noticed instantly whenever a new release slows down their phone, but in this case, what happened was someone on a benchmark group noticed the slowdown instantly went away with a new battery.
Until then, Apple store personnel were telling millions of people they
needed a new phone, which is where Apple's sheer greed came in because
Apple _knew_ this (which is why Apple lost all the court cases).
The best evidence was presented in the French _criminal_ case where Apple
was forced to tell the truth for a month on the French Apple web site.
how would *you* have solved the problem of unexpected sudden shutdowns?
Apple hid the problem until they couldn't. I would have told the truth.
Apple lied from the start about it. I would have told the truth.
Apple secretly throttled the iPhones. I would have replaced the battery. Apple didn't tell its support personnel. I would have told them the truth. Apple lied when they blamed battery chemistry. I would have told the truth. Apple low R&D is why the power design stinks. I would have invested in R&D. Apple charged people for new batteries. I would have made them free.
etc.
The good news is this is the classic case now in MBA teachings for how NOT
to treat your customer when you find a fundamental flaw in your product.
This seems like an honest approach, and most would like that. I'd buy
a new battery at an apple store, knowing it would fix the problem for
sure.
there was no need to buy a new battery.
It's no longer shocking how _ignorant_ the iKooks like nospam always are.
2. Apple secretly "solved" that problem by fucking its customer
On 2022-07-02 18:16, Andy Burnelli wrote:
nospam wrote:
I didn't have an apple phone till last year, so I don't know about
this, but I wonder; Did apple notify users they were throttling the
IOS in phones with crappy or old batteries? If they did notify, then
I don't see the problem, and professor arlen is straining at gnats.
what apple did (which is not what you describe or widely reported) was
in the release notes. granted, nobody reads them, but it was disclosed.
Apple admitted to lying about the release notes, where what happened was Apple secretly backdated them well after the fact, and even then, Apple's "admission" of throttling was carefully yet rather brilliantly cleverly worded to "look" like throttling phones to less than half improved speeds.
In the _criminal_ case, *Apple admitted to "knowingly and willingly"* defrauding affected customers.Why must you lie?
Apple paid the _criminal_ fine because in criminal court you can't buy your way out of the admission of guilt like you can with civil cases.There was no criminal case.
On 2022-07-04 10:47, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 at 02:24:24, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote: (my
responses usually follow points raised):
Apple paid the _criminal_ fine because in criminal court you can't
buy your
way out of the admission of guilt like you can with civil cases.
There was no criminal case.
You are an idiot because everyone else knows about the French criminal case that Apple pleaded guilty to and paid the fine and publicly admitted guilt.
Look it up before you respond because otherwise you're just an idiot moron.You look it up and present the evidence of your claim.
There was a SETTLEMENT before there was an actual case in a court of law.
nospam wrote:
that's one key reason why ios is so popular.
Hi nospam,
All your self esteem comes from the advertising of Apple.
I used to think you iKooks simply lied about everything, but the fact that
we discussed these issues in huge threads and yet you don't remember a
single fact just bolsters my more recent opinion that you're just stupid.
However, lots of people are stupid and most are not iKooks.
The _reason_ you iKooks are iKooks is because of three things:
1. Your IQ is well below normal, and, 2. You have no education
whatseover, but worse
3. *All your self esteem comes from the advertising of Apple*.
The fact is Apple paid the _criminal_ fine and published their guilt on the Apple French web site for a month as part of the _criminal_ penalty for knowingly and willfully defrauding its customers.
that's one key reason why ios is so popular.
nospam wrote:
that's one key reason why ios is so popular.Hi nospam,
All your self esteem comes from the advertising of Apple.
I used to think you iKooks simply lied about everything, but the fact that
we discussed these issues in huge threads and yet you don't remember a
single fact just bolsters my more recent opinion that you're just stupid.
However, lots of people are stupid and most are not iKooks.
The _reason_ you iKooks are iKooks is because of three things:
1. Your IQ is well below normal, and,
2. You have no education whatseover, but worse
3. *All your self esteem comes from the advertising of Apple*.
The fact is Apple paid the _criminal_ fine and published their guilt on the Apple French web site for a month as part of the _criminal_ penalty for knowingly and willfully defrauding its customers.
We discussed this at length, and you know that as the thread was huge.
The fact you forgot just means you're not lying - you're just stupid.
All of your ego is wrapped up in Apple advertisements because you have _nothing_ in your life other than Apple to gloat about, nospam.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 307 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 70:29:00 |
| Calls: | 6,915 |
| Files: | 12,380 |
| Messages: | 5,432,022 |